[Bullseye]

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:21 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Just out of curiosity, I wonder what Mr. Caisley, who of course originally pulled the plug, is up to while the fish twitch on the bank?

You're not the only one wondering that.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:23 am  

M@islebugs wrote:

The RFL have NOT helped the club, they have helped Peter Hood stay in position years after anyone could see the man was wholly incompetent and dishonest.

By SECRETLY lending him 700k they made the situation worse not better. Had their own audit dept looked at the situation they could have made public what was going on whilst our Chairman was telling everyone that the pledeges had been a great success and the club's finances were in good shape. Had they acted then the club had a number of options,

1, A smaller loan with input from the RFL to reduce outgoings.
2, RFL oversight of signings
3, Change the board
4, Enter admin but still holding the lease.
5, Launch the pledge

The RFL were registering new players at the club while owed 700k?

Despite the club not making one single repayment, they then (apparently without the knowledge of the other shareholders or a single other member club) negotiated to buy the lease. Again they made no attempt to look into the reason why the club could not make any repayments or why they needed to sell the lease. Did Balke Solly, the head of licensing, who is in charge of the process of financial oversight not think that this suggested a problem? They then joined with Peter Hood in explaining that decison with a story which looked shaky at the time but which now can be said to be downright lies.

In the interim period the club have lost the entire sum of money handed over by the RFL plus 500k of supporters money. Clearly the administration of the club is the key problem - a matter I and others have raised time and again, but the conduct of the RFL needs to be looked into. WHY did they enter into not one but two secret arrangements, particularly as the club had breached the terms of the first one? Where were the RFL auditors? What did Peter Hood tell them for them to act in this manner? What did Nigel Wood tell the RFL board to get them to agree to this?

Nobody screamed for administration. I and others pointed out time and time and time again that the people running the club were not up to the job and should stand down. Where we are now is an inevitable consequence of these warnings not being heeded. This is a wholly preventable disaster.

where did you direct these warnings??? to the Shareholding? the RFL? or on RLFANS????

Too many are critical and want to say "I told you so" rather than getting off the arriss's and doing something - there was a poster yesterday belittling the efforts of those organising the meeting yesterday.... WHAT HAVE YOU DONE? apart from blather on incessantly on a website......

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:40 am  

M@islebugs wrote:

...
Nobody screamed for administration. I and others pointed out time and time and time again that the people running the club were not up to the job and should stand down. Where we are now is an inevitable consequence of these warnings not being heeded. ...

Heheh, you were the man who would have saved the Bulls, all hunky dory if only "they" had listened to you. Riiight. You had a team of rich business experts just waiting to ride in and make the club wealthy, if only.

Neither you nor anyone without the inside track on the Bulls' internal finances would have had any clue whether the management were "up to the job", so stop trying to big yourself up as if you were some sort of Oracle. You knew nothing.

Or if you really did know, then I blame YOU, for not spilling the beans, and forcing the issue.

That obvious point aside, calls for the board to resign seem to be endemic across all sports. What is rare as rocking horse shiit is the provision of better alternatives. Or indeed ANY alternatives. And of course our board DID, eventually, stand down. Much good that's done us.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:44 am  

M@islebugs wrote:

The RFL have NOT helped the club, they have helped Peter Hood stay in position years after anyone could see the man was wholly incompetent and dishonest.

By SECRETLY lending him 700k they made the situation worse not better. Had their own audit dept looked at the situation they could have made public what was going on whilst our Chairman was telling everyone that the pledeges had been a great success and the club's finances were in good shape. Had they acted then the club had a number of options,

1, A smaller loan with input from the RFL to reduce outgoings.
2, RFL oversight of signings
3, Change the board
4, Enter admin but still holding the lease.
5, Launch the pledge

The RFL were registering new players at the club while owed 700k?

Despite the club not making one single repayment, they then (apparently without the knowledge of the other shareholders or a single other member club) negotiated to buy the lease. Again they made no attempt to look into the reason why the club could not make any repayments or why they needed to sell the lease. Did Balke Solly, the head of licensing, who is in charge of the process of financial oversight not think that this suggested a problem? They then joined with Peter Hood in explaining that decison with a story which looked shaky at the time but which now can be said to be downright lies.

In the interim period the club have lost the entire sum of money handed over by the RFL plus 500k of supporters money. Clearly the administration of the club is the key problem - a matter I and others have raised time and again, but the conduct of the RFL needs to be looked into. WHY did they enter into not one but two secret arrangements, particularly as the club had breached the terms of the first one? Where were the RFL auditors? What did Peter Hood tell them for them to act in this manner? What did Nigel Wood tell the RFL board to get them to agree to this?

Nobody screamed for administration. I and others pointed out time and time and time again that the people running the club were not up to the job and should stand down. Where we are now is an inevitable consequence of these warnings not being heeded. This is a wholly preventable disaster.

Lots I agree with their but as you say yourself, much of the iceberg Hood had us sailing towards was concealed. How were those with a 'Hood's all we've got' mentality, of which I was one, supposed to know all that was going on behind the scenes?

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:48 am  

Not bothered at this time of how we got to where we are (although as and when the final act is known I do want to know the real situation), I'm more bothered to know what I've got to support in the future, preferably in SL but if not a team built of home grown young talent in the lower leagues. At this moment I have significant doubts I'll be watching anything apart from following the sport on Sky as I can't see a path to a positive outcome for Bradford.

[Bulliac]

Re: Fans Meeting at City Hall - Mon 7pm : Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:14 am  

slideby wrote:

I am really wondering whether it would be best going bust now. We are embarrassing our great club, and must be creating animosity amongst those playing for us.

How long can we expect the staff to work for nothing? and more importantly, how the hell do we build a squad for next year? the players cannot wait until the end of august to find out their fate, it is unfair on those that have pulled on our shirt.

I kind of hope/ expect that if we are to survive we will see the club sell a couple of players, as I am sure they will not want to sit around and wait to see how it pans out.

I said on another post that if we are to go bust then the sooner it happens the better, the more time available to prepare the easier it would be. Finishing the season is far less important then still being here next season to me. Problem of course is the if bit.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:15 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Heheh, you were the man who would have saved the Bulls, all hunky dory if only "they" had listened to you. Riiight. You had a team of rich business experts just waiting to ride in and make the club wealthy, if only.

Neither you nor anyone without the inside track on the Bulls' internal finances would have had any clue whether the management were "up to the job", so stop trying to big yourself up as if you were some sort of Oracle. You knew nothing.

Or if you really did know, then I blame YOU, for not spilling the beans, and forcing the issue.

That obvious point aside, calls for the board to resign seem to be endemic across all sports. What is rare as rocking horse shiit is the provision of better alternatives. Or indeed ANY alternatives. And of course our board DID, eventually, stand down. Much good that's done us.

Re: Fans Meeting at City Hall - Mon 7pm : Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:19 am  

debaser wrote:

Sad though it is, I think we need to fold now too. Enough is enough. The RFL are clearly taking the p!$$ now, letting us play on to the end of the season just to avoid any more embarrassment but then they will let us fold anyway. And by then it will be too late to do anything to save the club.

You often post rational, considered reactions. This isn't one of them.

Nobody is "taking the p!ss" from what I see. The problem that I observe is a banal expectation from some fans for the consortiums and RFL to be exact and revealing of the current state of play (including details of all bids and rebuttals) along with details of the RFL's exact support, or otherwise.

Quite simply, this isn't going to happen and wouldn't in any reasonable, prudent business or governing body. It is quite farcical for some fans to be demanding "answers" when their are no answers to give and more critically, why would any savvy business person reveal details of a confidential nature. There needs to be a huge level of realism by some elements that this is a process which has covert elements by definition. You don't write down your chess moves for the opposition.

As for folding, why? Wakefield aren't doing too badly and well done to them. Holding your nerve in these situations is paramount and unfortunately some people are able to do so and others unable.

More importantly, taking a lowest common denominator approach of "we're doomed" will do absolutely nothing to energise anybody or any element of this lengthy, necessary process.

Fingers crossed everything will be fine and possibly, be revealed when it's relevant. I'm not sure that is now.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:44 am  

There seems to be a view that a good deal of your problems are down to RFL, but the powers that be will have asked for the loans and it is up to them to manage the club finances and not the RFL. I know this hurts but from an outsiders point of view I think the deal the RFL are giving you is very good.

If the various bids are on the basis of give you superleague and the ground back and we will give you (RFL) a small amount of money and the actual amount of the value of the bid is just to keep the club afloat e.g. £500,000 debt and two years running the club at a loss equals £1,000,000 per year so that is the £2,500,000 million investment then you can't expect the RFL to accept. People seem the think that turning bids down makes the RFL the devil incarnate but I can't see how the RFL are the problem here.

Having the Bulls in Super League is a good thing but it has proved a great embarrasment. The administrator view that SL need to pay the wages is wrong. The only way this should happen is an advance of sky payments due. The way how he is dealing with this is terrible. Sell Whitehead pay the wages! He has extended the deadline by another month and has sacked the staff. Does he expect them to keep working on goodwill? That is totally unfair and taking the mickey out of respected people.

I really hope this is sorted out and soon but Bradford have over invested beyong their means player wise and no doubt as with all club the full financial picture given to the RFL was somewhat hazy. But don't for one minute think that the RFL are the issues here or they owe you in some way. Remeber you lent big money off them agreed to pay it back and didn't and that isn't good for SL.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:57 am  

Dannyboywt wrote:

There seems to be a view that a good deal of your problems are down to RFL, but the powers that be will have asked for the loans and it is up to them to manage the club finances and not the RFL. I know this hurts but from an outsiders point of view I think the deal the RFL are giving you is very good.

If the various bids are on the basis of give you superleague and the ground back and we will give you (RFL) a small amount of money and the actual amount of the value of the bid is just to keep the club afloat e.g. £500,000 debt and two years running the club at a loss equals £1,000,000 per year so that is the £2,500,000 million investment then you can't expect the RFL to accept. People seem the think that turning bids down makes the RFL the devil incarnate but I can't see how the RFL are the problem here.

Having the Bulls in Super League is a good thing but it has proved a great embarrasment. The administrator view that SL need to pay the wages is wrong. The only way this should happen is an advance of sky payments due. The way how he is dealing with this is terrible. Sell Whitehead pay the wages! He has extended the deadline by another month and has sacked the staff. Does he expect them to keep working on goodwill? That is totally unfair and taking the mickey out of respected people.

I really hope this is sorted out and soon but Bradford have over invested beyong their means player wise and no doubt as with all club the full financial picture given to the RFL was somewhat hazy. But don't for one minute think that the RFL are the issues here or they owe you in some way. Remeber you lent big money off them agreed to pay it back and didn't and that isn't good for SL.

The devil is in the detail which is unknown to us, that is the problem! No one of sound mind would say that the RFL has not to get a fair deal, but the RFL are saying buy the club with no certainty - which no one will sign upto. Hopefully the reality is different from the rhetoric and discussions are going on around how much they will sell the lease back for and what gurantees will be given about the current license as one would expect in a normal business arrangement with someone looking to rescue a company - but if they aren't prepared to discuss it (no pre conditions statements), they are allowing the club to die!!! Maybe previous Director's/management teams have deserved this treatment, but the fans, coaching staff and current players haven't.